AD-A237 314

United States ArmyRecruiting Command

USAREC SR 91-3

OVER-REPRESENTATION IN THE U.S. ARMY OFMINORITIES AND WOMEN IN

CAREER MANAGEMENT FIELDS71, 76, 77, and 94

BY DTICSELEC TE

STEVEN E. GALING 5 JUN 2 6 19910

C

MAY 1991 91-03483

APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE;DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED

U.S. ARMY RECRUITING COMMANDPROGRAM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION DIRECTORATE

PLANS AND ANALYSIS DIVISIONFORT SHERIIDAN, ILLINOIS 60037

I Form ApprovedREPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0168

P,,iq r.oinJ rd , her dtin lneeded. iri (oprif it~ ¼ý . flJd 0 aeA. I f r no ~ ~ iargtetn rr ew'nq Waint~r, tcrhing e.,iing data Iae,g~ler~ ridmaia'1in,' dlu edd rdbml~iqad c~lin h ollection of inf ormation selnd commients reg arding thist buden estimate or ann othili ittwciof bi

"I ollitn cf nrinnmiri~on, inuing sug-. miois for reduirij thi ba'drnr to YWrhiith 'on Hridguadli nro *ib(e% Direoiurate f,)r in! fmai mon Cpciaooris and Repris, 1215 inlofertonSleee Ila . Ig 204.0110 qlon. VA ?1202-4301.-d V;~ lhie lfocr~ Ni Mr arje nrt An lul ta~ i Paperwnork Iedu( boin 1`1011'([0 704.0iiltt), Wa inglom. )C 2050Jd.

1, AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) j2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

110 may 1991 IFINAL Feb 91- May 914. TITLE AND SUBTITLE S . FUNDING NUMBERSOver-Representation in the tJ.S. Army of Minorities andWbEIen in Career Managnemnt Fields (CMFs) 71, 76, 77,and 94.6. AUTHOR(S)

CPT Steven E. Galing

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

United States Army Recruiting Carrnand REPORT NUMBER

Program Analysis and Evaluation Directorate (1RJPAE-PA) USArEC SR 91-3Fort Sheridan, 11 60037

9. SPONSORING/ MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(E$) 110. SPONSORING/ MONITORING

United States Army Recruiting Carmand AEC EOTNME

Program Analysis and Evaluation Directorate (RCPAE-RS) USAREC SR 91-3

Fort Sheridan, IL 60037

11, SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION /AVAILABILITY STATEME NT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Approved for public release; distribution unilimited

IF, ABSTRACT (Maxilmuim 200 words)

__-ý-2 This study examines why minorities and women are migrating into fourCareer Management Fields (CMFs): 71-Administration, 76-Supply, 77-Petroleum and Water, and 94-Food Service. These CMFs have a dispro-portionate percentage of minorities and women relative to other Armyspecialties. The Recruiting Command was researched for any inherentbias which might be directing minorities and women into these skillareas. Youth attitudes pertaining to work preference and militaryservice were scrutinized to determine if minorities and/or women are,predisposed to these CMFs. it was found that the Recruiting Commandis not encouraging minorities and women to enter these particularIspecialties. Also, research indicates that minorities score lower onthe Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) test. The low

IASVAB score requirements of the 4 CMFs; coupled with the apparentIpredisposition of many minorities and/or women to enlist for theseItypes of jobs are the primary reasons for over-representation...-.*( -. 2

S14. SU3JECT TERMS Military occupational Specialities W~4S), 1S. NUMBER OF PAGES

Minorirties, youth attitudes, Career Managenent Fields (CMvF), 4

lArmed Services Vocational. Aptitude Test (ASVAI3) 16. P11C/A D

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLAssiF-ICATION 20. (IMITATION OF AFSTRACII OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ARS1RACr

UNCLASSIFI1O UNCLASSIPILD tiNrIASIFITID 1EL,NA M-10~ O1.2i30-5500 Staddard Form 296l (Reyv 2-89)

Pfew~rwbd by ANY Sid 1J9 19828102

OV.R-REPRESENTATION IN THE U.S. ARMY OFMINORITIES AND WOMEN IN CAREER MANAGEMENT

FIELDS 71, 76, 77 AND 94

by

STEVEN E. GALING

May 1991 'Diet oes

USAREC STUDY REPORT 91-3

for

U.S. Army Recruiting CommandProgram Analysis and Evaluation Directorate

Plans and Analysis DivisionFort Sheridan, Illinois 60037

DISCLAIMER

The views, opinions and findings in this study report are those of the author and should

not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy or decision, unless so

designed by other authorized documents.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I take this opportunity to acknowledge the immeasurable assistance I receiv,-d from

Matt Fuller, Rich Graham, June Reynolds and Ronald Cunitz. Matt Fuller developed much of

the methodology and computer code used to obtain the information analyzed in this paper. J,'ne

Reynolds created several files that were used to obtain information on recruiters, guidance

counselors and line scores for the Career Management Fields. Rich Graham dedicated many

hours graphing data and editing the final document. Ronald Cunitz provided invaluable advice

and guidance throughout the entire process. Without their collective technical expertise, advice

and support, this paper would not have been possible.

/

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study examines the migration of minorities and females into Career Manage-

ment Fields (CMFs) 71 (administration), 76 (supply), 77 (petroleum and water) and 94

(food service). The report is divided into two parts: the first evaluates the U.S. Army Re-cruiting Command to ascertain if the recruiting process is biased; the second examines

youth attitudes pertaining to work preference and military service to determine if minori-

ties and/or women are predisposed to these CMFs.

Research indicates that the Army is fairly representing the percentage of minorities

and women in all aspects of the recruiting process except Joint Optical Information Net-work (JOIN) videos. JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 were found to over-repre-

sent minorites as compared to the Army as a whole. The impact of JOIN videos, how-

ever, is considered minimal when compared to the influence of recruiters, guidance

counselors and advertisements.

Surveys of youth attitudes reveal that minorities have a higher propensity to enlist.In addition, minorities and women are more inclined to work in administrative positions.

One may conclude that enlisting minorities are somewhat predisposed to select CMFs 71,

76, 77 and 94. In every Military Occupational Speciality (MOS) there is at least one

qualifying Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) score. Also, research

shows that minorities score lower on the ASVAB. The low ASVAB score requirements,

coupled with the apparent predisposition of many minorities and/or women to work in

CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94, are the main factors contributing to the over-representation ofminorities and/or women in these CMFs.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MLE Page

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................... ii

TA BLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................... iii

LIST O F TABLES ............................................................................................... v

LIST O F FIGU RES ............................................................................................... vi

INTRODU CTIO N ................................................................................................. I

M inority and Fem ale Representation ........................................................ 1

Arm y Representation versus the M arket ................................................ 2

REPRESENTATION IN CMFs 71, 76, 77 AND 94 ........................................ 3

CM F T 71: Adm inistration ........................................................................... 4

CM F 76: Supply ..................................................................................... 5

CM F 77: Petroleum and W ater ................................................................ 7

CM F 94: Food Service ............................................................................. 8

USAREC INFLUEN CES .................................................................................. 10

Advertising ............................................................................................. 10

Television .............................................................................................. 10

Print ....................................................................................................... . 11

Recruiter Publicity Item s ............................... : ........................................ 12

Advertising Sum m arized ........................................................................ 12

Recruiters ............................................................................................... 13

LM

iii

Pg.Guidance Counselors ................................................................................ 13

Sales Presentations .................................................................................... 14

Sales Book .............................................................................................. 15

JOIN Videos .............................................................................................. 15

YOUTH ATTITUDES .......................................................................................... 17

YATS ........................................................................................................ 18

1990 Youth Survey ................................................................................... 19

New Recruit Survey ................................................................................ 20

TEST SCORES ................................................................................................... 22

Test Score Categories .............................................................................. 22

Line Scores .............................................................................................. 23

AFQT Scores ............................................................................................ 25

USAREC M ISSION ACHIEVEM ENT ............................................................. 26

Build-Down Initiatives ..................................... 27

U . S. Arm y Reserves................................................................................ 28

CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................. 28

BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................. 30

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Page1 Representation in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 .................................. 4

2 CMF 7 1: Typical duties and basic qualifications ........................ 4

3 CMF 76: Typical duties and basic qualifications ........................ 6

4 CMF 77: Typical duties and basic qualifications ........................ 7

5 CMF 94: Typical duties and basic qualifications ......................... 8

6 M inim um line scores .................................................................. 23

7 USAREC mission achievement (1990) for CMFs 71, 76, 77an d 94 ........................................................................................ .. 27

I I I I I ' 1 I II I ' IV

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

1 Total male youth population ........................................................ 2

2 Arm y m ale accessions .................................................................. 2

3 Total female youth population ...................................................... 2

4 Arm y female accessions ................................................................ 2

5 Percentage of male and female accessions .................................. 3

6 Percent entry into CM F 71 .......................................................... 5

7 Percentage of whites and minorities in CMF 71 ........................... 5

8 Percentage of men versus women in CMF 71 ............................... 5

9 Percent entry into CM F 76 ........................................................... 6

10 Percentage of whites and minorities in CMF 76 .......................... 6

11 Percentage of men versus women in CMF 76 ............................... 6

12 Percent entry into C M F 77 .......................................................... 7

13 Percentage of whites and minorities in CMF 77 ........................... 7

14 Percentage of men versus women in CMF 77 ............................... 8

15 Percent entry into CM F 94 .......................................................... 9

16 Percentage of whites versus minorities in CMF 94 ....................... 9

17 Percentage of men versus women in CMF 94 .............................. 9

18 Percentage of personnel type appearing in television commercials 11

"9 Percentage of personnel type appearing in 16 posters .................. 11

20 Percentage of personnel type appearing in RPls .......................... 12

vi

Page

21 Percentage of enlistees that entered the same prior CMFof the recruiter ........................................................................... 13

22 Percentage of enlistees that entered the same prior CMFof the guidance counselor ........................................................ 14

23 Percentage of personnel type appearing in the sales book ..... 15

24 Percentage of whites and minorities in JOIN videos forCM Fs 71, 76, 77, 94, 31 and 88 ................................................ 16

25 Percentage of men and women in JOIN videos for CMFs 71,76, 77, 94, 31 and 88 ................................................................ 16

26 Percentage of whites and minorities in JOIN videos forother CM Fs ................................................................................ 17

27 Percentage of men and women in JOIN videos for other CMFs 17

28 Percentage breakout of future plans, white male responses ....... 18

29 Percentage breakout of future plans, minority male responses ..... 18

30 Percentage breakout of future plans, white female responses ....... 19

31 Percentage breakout of future plans, minority female responses 19

32 Percentage breakout of job choices, males and females .......... 20

33 Percentage breakout of job choices, whites and minorities ....... 20

34 Percentage in CMF 71 who prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistment ................................. 21

35 Percentage in CMF 76 who prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistm ent ................................................................... 21

36 Percentage in CMF 77 who prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistm ent ................................................................... 21

vii

LM 1

Page

37 Percentage in CMF 94 who prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistm ent ..................................................................... 21

38 Percent of personnel in TSC I-IIIA ............................................. 22

39 Percent of personnel in TSC IIIB ................................................ 22

40 Percent of personnel in TSC IV .................................................. 23

41 General maintenance test: Percent of Army applicantsscoring 90 or higher ..................................................................... 24

42 Clerical Test: Percent of Army applicants scoring 95 or higher 24

43 Operator and Food Test: Percent of Army applicantssco.ing 90 or higher ..................................................................... 24

44 Skilled Technician Test: Percent of Army applicants

scoring 95 or higher ..................................................................... 24

45 Percent eligible for CMF 71 with a CL score of 95 .................... 25

46 Percent eligible for CMF 76 with a CL score of 90 and a GMscore of 85 ............................................................................... .. 25

47 Percent scoring below the AFQT median of 56 ........................... 26

viii

INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Army and the other military services have the difficult task of assigning enlistedapplicants into appropriate skills. Naturally, the Army must ensure that career management

fields (CMFs) are adequately staffed to achieve organizational objectives. CMFs are comprisedof at least one military occupational specialty (MOS). Enlistees are assigned to a specific MOSbased on the needs of the Army and the individual's preference. However, CMFs and MOSs

have varying technical skill-level requirements (i.e., clerical, electrical, general maintenance,

etc.). An important criterion in ascertaining whether the applicant has the potential to perform a

particular skill is his or her scores on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery Test(ASVAB). The ASVAB consists of 10 subtests that measure an applicant's aptitude for variousoccupations. If an applicant's score is equal to or above the minimum required for a particular

MOS, and the Army has a need, then the MOS may be offered to the applicant. Availablespecialties are determined by projected Army needs and the current rates of enlistment and

attrition.The purpose of this paper is to address the apparent migration of minorities and females into

four CMFs: 71 (administration), 76 (supply), 77 (petroleum and water) and 94 (food service).Listed below are the ancillary issues investigated:

1. Are minorities and/or females over-represented in these CMFs?2. Is the U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) channeling minorities and/

or females into these CMFs?

3. Are minorities and/or females predisposed to these CMFs?

4. Will future build-down initiatives adversely affect the racial/gender mix of

contracts?

Minority and Female Renresentation

The primary issue is minority and female representation in four specific CMFs. Before

scrutinizing the four CMFs, one should first consider the minority/female representation in theArmy as a whole. Do the percentages of minorities/females in the Army reflect the percentagesin the available market? Minority and female representation in the Army is important as a

benchmark for comparing the mix in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94. Accessions are used in this paper

instlead of total Army strength because the USAREC mission is to access qualified young men

and women into the Army.

Army Representation versus the Market

Minority male representation during the period 1985-90 is shown in f .gures 1 and 2;

figures 3 and 4 depict female representation.

UeM--

11111" 614 IR

$1. 711

Percent of 17-to 21-Year-Old Males -Percent or Army Male Accessions

Figure 1. Total male youth population Figure 2. Army male accessions

SOURCE: Woods A; PW*l Ecoecuke, low, 1990. SOURCE: USAREC minl-ismagr file., 196u40.

MINORITY w

*0.EBI EILI _

Percent of 17-to 21-Year-Old Females Percent of Army Female Accessions

Figure 3. Total female youth population Figure 4. Army !remale accessions

SOURCE: Woods At Pool. Ecoeovaks, lse., 1990. SOUJRCE: USAREC in.lelmmse, fike. 1915J90.

Mfinority male representation in 1985 was 7.7 pewrent higher thai the market. Since

1985, this percentage has gradually increased to 10.6 percont in 1990. It is clear that the percent-

age of minority males in the Army is greater thai' the market. Although the percentage of minor-

2

ity males in the Army has increased only 2.9 percent since 1985, it does indicate a widening gap

between the Army and the market.

Minority female representation in the Army is much greater than the market. In 1985, the

percentage of minority females was 21.1 percent higher in the Army than the market. This

percentage has steadily increased to 24.9 percent in 1990 (it was as high as 27.5 percent in 1989).

Overall female representation in the Army is also gradually increasing. Since 1985, the

percentage of female accessions has increased from 12.8 percent to 14.7 percent (figure 5).

While this increase does not appear significant, one must realize that women are excluded from

many CMFs because of the "combat code." Therefore, other CMFs (such as the four being

evaluated) may be receiving a much higher percentage increase in women.

IL

Fiscal Year

Figure S. Percentage of male andfemale accessions

SOURCE: USAREC mialSaW film, 1 9 90.

The composition of the modem Army is changing as the percentage of minorities andfemales increase. Therefore, one would expect increases in the percentage of minorities andwomen in CMFs 71,76, 77and 94. But is the percentage of minorities and women increasing

at a disproportionate rate compared to the Army as a whole?

REPRESENTATION IN CMFs 71,76. 77 AND 94

The overall minority/female representation in the Army and CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 isdepicted in table 1.

U U 5 U U3

Table 1. Representation in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94

Minority Percentage Female Pecntae

Army 31.3 14.7

CMF 71 55.4 50.3

CMF 76 54.0 33.6

CMF 77 48.5 32.4

CMF 94 51.9 30.4

SOURCE: USAREC mini.mutar nil 1 1990.

Undoubtedly, these four CMFs are over-represented with respect to minorities and women. The

bulk of the remaining text is dedicated to determining why.

It is important to understand the MOSs that comprise the four CMFs, The next section

will analyze the typical duties, basic qualifications and minority/female trends from 1985-90,

CMF 71! Administration

CMF 71 is comprised of 11 entry-level MOSs. Typical duties and basic qualifications for

this CMF are shown in table 2.

Table 2. CMF 71: Typical duties and basic qualifications

Ixn'a Dfl- BasiQ Oualifications

Personnel Typing SkillsLegal BookkeepingGeneral Admin. Basic ClericalClerical VWork Communication AbilitiesFiscal Acctng.Club Mgt.

SOURCE: Army Rqulatlon 611.201, HQDA, 31 Oct. 1987.

4

Figures 6-8 graphically illustrate the flow of minorities and females into CMF 71.

Na'm*

Fiscal Year Fisca Year

__Figure 6. Percent entry into CMIF 71 Figure 7. Percentage of whites andSOURCE: UsAREC .,,...aitw f•,lksý 9.•o minorities In CMF 71

SOURCE. USAREC shNl-nMauw flkss• 19WO,

IImU

raM-

U U

Fiscal YearYe

Figure i Percentage of hmenversus women In CM. 71

SOURCO: UUAAREC n•lmuaaw fiu IMS3840

During the period 1985-90, the percentage of minority accessions into CM 71 has in-

creased from 43.2 to 55.4 percent. Conversely, the percentage of female accessions has fluctu-

ated, with 50.3 percent comprising the CMF in 1990. Clearly, minorities are over-represented

in CMF 71 and are increasing at a much faster rate than the Army as a whole.

CMF 76 consists of 9 entry-level specialties. Typical duties and some basic qualifica-

tions for CMF 76 are shown in table 3.

5_...

S. • • n " " -i ... . i ...... ~~ iW -O. .. n - -- J " n - --

Table 3. CMF 76: Typical duties and basic qualifications

TypicalDies Basie Qualifleations

Procurement AttentivenessStorage InitiativeIssue DependabilityRepair Work Perceptual SpeedLaundry Number FacilityGraves Reg. Verbal AbilityParachute Rigger

SOURCE: Army Regulation 611.201, HQDA, 31 OCt. 1987.

Figures 9-11 chart the rapid increase of minorities and women in CMF 76 since 1986.

MA I11

IOU

-0ý40

Fiscal Year Fiscal YearFigure 9. Percent entry into CMF 76 Figure 10. Percentage of whites and

SOURCE: USAREC mini.master flie, 1985.90, minorities in CMF 76SOURCE: UNAREC mini-master files, 1985.90,

IgoUt

S9 Is OI

1 Fiscal YearFigure 11. Percentage of men versus

women in CMF 76

SOURCE: USAREC mini-master flies, 1985-90.

6

Minority accessions into CMF 76 have increased from 44.0 percent in 1986 to 54,0 per-

cent in 1990 (peaking at 57.2 percent in 1989). As with CMF 71, the percentage growth of

minorities has outpaced that of the Army as a whole. Female accessions have increased from

12.0 percent in 1986 to 33.6 percent in 1990 (with a peak of 41.4 percent in 1989). The almost

three-fold increase in the percentage of women combined with the large increase in minority per-

centages confirms that minorities and women are migrating into this CMF.

CMF 77! Petroleum and Water

CMF 77 has only three subspecialties. Typical duties and some basic qualifications for

CMF 77 are shown in table 4.

Table 4. CMF 77: Typical duties and basic qualifications

TpalDtg Basle Oualifications

Petroleum Storage Reasoning AbilityReceipt of Petro. Products AttentivenessDist. of Petro. Products Mechanical AptitudeWater Storage Number FacilityPurification OperationsTesting Petro. Products

SOURCE: Army Regulatlon 611.201, HQDA, 31 Oct. 1997.

Minority and female representation in CMF 77 is captured in figures 12-14.

U

MqIIWW

00 "

64 IS i S I I so

Fiscal Year of V N 0 tFiscal Year

Figure 12. Percent entry Into CMF 77 Figure 13. Percentage of whites andSOURCE: USAREC minimautr fils, 196S.90. minorities In CMF 77

SOURCE: USAREC milnlmastr filk, 1965.90,

7

M|

L~I&

U U If U U N

Fiscal Year

Figure 14. Percentage of men versus womenin CMF 77

SOtR('E: USAREC mini-mAsti fltes, 1985,90.

Fexnale representation in CMF 77 is quite similiar to CMF 76. In 1986, only 12.0 percentof the accessions were women while in 1990 it was 32.4 percent. Minority representation has

fluctuated somiewhat from 1985 to 1990, but constituted 48.5 percent of the accessions in 1990.

(CMF 94: Food Service

CNIF 94 has only one MOS, 9413, Several of the duties and qualifications for this CMFare delineated in table 5.

Table 5. CMF 94: Typical duties and basic qualifications

Typical Basic Oualificafions

Planning Food Menus Knowledge of Sanitary ProceduresPreparing Food Use of Food Service MachineryCooking Food AttentivenessServing Food DependabilityAdministration Good Near Vision

Sense of Smell

SOURCE: Army Regulaioun 611.201, IIQDA, 31 Oct. 1987,

8

ie overall accession of personnel into CMF 94 is depicted in figures 15-17.

0 O F.

Os

i

asi 90, Isa s s

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year

Figure 15. Percent entry into CMF 94 Figure 16. Percentage of whites versusSOURCE: USAREC min.imastar les, 199S-90. ininorties in CMF 94

SOURCE. USAREC mint-mastr ies, 19•5.-9.

,

Fiscal Year

Figure 17. Percentage of men versuswomen in CMF 94

SOURCE: USAREC mini-master fMle, 19U-90.

Female representation in CMF 94 has been steadily increasing since 1986. The 12.8

rcent increase in accessions during the period 1986 to 1990 (30.4 minus 17.6) is not as great as

• other three CMFs, but it is still much higher than the overall increase in the Army. Minori-

s in CMF 94 have increased from a low of 41.7 percent of accessions in 1986 to 51.9 percent

1990.

From the foregoing analysis, it is evident that minorities and females are over-represented

9

in these four CMFs. Two questions still remain: (1) Is the Army somehow encouraging minori-

ties and women to enlist in these CMFs? (2) Ar minorities and/or women predisposed to the

types of jobs available in these CMFs? The first question is answered by examining the influ-

ence that USAREC has on the enlistee.

USAREC INFLUENCES

USAREC influences the unsold market in many ways. Listed below are four areas that

were evaluated.

1. Advertising

2. Recruiters

3. Guidance Counselors

4. Sales Promotions

Each of the above four areas is analyzed in depth to ascertain if USAREC is channeling

minorities and/or women into CMFs 71, 76, 77 or 94.

Advetr~tising

Advertising is critical in reaching the unsold market. The goal is to generate enough

interest so that the individual either contacts a recruiter or responds positively when approached

by a recruiter. Three advertising mediums were evaluated to determine if minorities and/or

women are over-represented or depicted in stereotyped roles. Only visual delivery mediums

were evaluated because many radio messages are locally developed and are not available for

analysis.

A total of 41 different television commercials were evaluated covering the period 1985-

90. The percentage of minorities and women depicted were counted to determine racial repre-

sentation (figure 18). Because many commercials are fast moving, only the prominent individu-

als were counted.

10

Minority Females 3.0

Minority Males 24.7

White Females 10.4

White Males 61.9m7

I.

Figure 18. Percentage of personnel type appearing intelevision commercials

SOURCE: Compiled from data from Adverthdag and PublicAffairs Direcorate, USAREC.

Overall, the commercials accurately reflect the Army's racial mix (27.7 percent minorities

,ere shown while the actual Army percentage is 31.3 percent). Personnel are shown in a variety

)f skills without stereotyping minorities or females. From this analysis, it appears that televi-

;ion, arguably the Army's most potent advertising tool, is unbiased.

ErIt

Sixteen posters currently on the market were evaluated. The percentage of prominent

)ersonnel were counted. Results are shown in figure 19.

Minority Males 21.4

Whit* Females Jr14.3

White Males 64.3

Figure 19. Percentage of personnel type appearing in16 posters

SOURCE- Compiled from data rrom Advertising and PublicAffairs Directorate, USAREC.

The vast majority of the posters depict only one or two prominent individuals. Therefore,

11

the sample size is quite small. However, the individuals portrayed are performing a variety of

important Army skills without stereotyping or under-representing minorities or women. In

summary, print advertisements accurately reflect the Army's mix of minorities and women.

Recruiter Publicity Items

USAREC currently uses 34 different recruiter publicity items (RPIs). Again, the number

of minorities and women were counted to determine if minorities and/or women are under- or

over-represented (figure 20).

Minority Females 2.8

Minority Males 21.9

White Females 12.3

White Males

Figure 20. Percentage of personnel type appearing in RPIsSOUNCEt Compiled from data from AdverdlinS udPublic Affae Dirscoraste, USAREC,

Overall, the percentage of females depicted (15.1 percent) in RPIs compares favorably

with their representation (14.7 percent) in the Army. Minority representation in RPIs is 24.7

percent. This is close but below the Army average of 31.3 percent. RPls appear to adequately

represent the racial mix in the Army.

Advertiling Summarized

Many of the advertisements portray the Army as an institution that offers valuable techni-

cal skills in addition to educational benefits. White and minority women are not stereotyped;

rather, they are shown in a variety of exciting and challenging positions such as communications

and aviation. The percentage of minority men performing tasks in combat and academic scenar-

ios accurately reflects actual Army representation. The advertisements do not appear to encour-

age minorities to join the Army for a particular skill.

12

Although advertising is important, the primary responsibility for contracting young men

and women into the Army falls on the recruiter. The recruiter's task is to sell the Army. How-

ever, it is conceivable that Army recruiters could be selling a specific CMF to a recruit. This

leads to the question: Is it possible that recruiters are selling skills based on their Army experi-

ences? This question is answered by analyzing the percentage of accessions that entered the

same prior CMF of the recruiter during the period 1985-90. In order to provide a basis for com-

parison, two other CMFs that accept women (31: Signal Operations and 88: Transportation)

were also evaluated (figure 21).

I

71 76 77 W8 31 68

CMF Control CMFFigure 21. Percentage of enlistees that entered

the same prior CMF of the recruiter

SOURCE. USAREC mbi-wasur flks, 1S96590

Less than 8.3 percent of accessions in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 were enlisted by recruiters

with the same previous CMF. Therefore, one may conclude that recruiters are not channeling

minorities or women into these particular CMFs.

Guidance Counselors

Guidance counselors are responsible for closing the sale. They enter pertinent personal

data about the applicant into a centralized database called REQUEST. Based on the needs of the

Army and the applicant's qualifications, REQUEST offers the applicant one or more MOSs.

The applicant is given the opportunity to view a Joint Optical Information Network (JOIN) video

13

I,*.

.. t*.

4 -~t. -. , .- _ __ ___ __ ___ ___ __ ___ __

that describes typical jobs in a specific MOS. Ideally, the guidance counselor tries to sell the

MOSs that REQUEST identifies as the most critically short. There is room for negotiation but

the needs of the Army are paramount. As with the recruiter, it is possible that guidance counsel-

ors could bias applicants' choices by selling MOSs based on their previously held CMF. This

possibility is explored by analyzing the percentage of processed applicants that enter the same

previous CMF of the guidance counselor during the period 1985-90. CMFs 31 and 88 were also

evaluated to provide a basis for comparison (figure 22).

10

0I-

71 70 77

CMF] Control CMF

Figure 22. Percentage of enlistees that entered the sameprior CMF of the guidance counselor

SOURCE: USAREC mini-madtr filies, 1965.90.

The results show that there is little correlation between the prior CMF of the guidance

counselors and the CMFs of their enlistees. Therefore, one can conclude that guidance counsel-

ors are not channeling minorities or women into CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94.

Sales Presentations

Throughout the recruitment process, potential enlistees are shown a wide variety of audio

and visual material about the Army. Recruiters often use the sales book to help convince an indi-vidual that the Army provides excellent skill training, educational benefits and adventure. In

addition, two- to three-minute JOIN videos are available (these are also used by the guidance

counselors). These two sales mediums were analyzed to determine if the Army is consciously or

subconsciously encouraging minorities or women to select an MOS in CMF 71, 76, 77 or 94.

14

A sales book was reviewed to determine the percentage of minorities and women.

Results are shown in figure 23.

Minority Females a

Minority Males

White Females 12

White Males 63

Figure 23. Percentage of personnel type appearing in the sales bookSOURCE: Compiled from USAREC sal book, 1991.

The percentage of minorities and females depicted in the sales book is 25.0 and 20.0percent, respectively. This compares favorably with the Army average of 31.3 percent forminorities and 14.7 percent for females. In addition, the pictorials avoid sterotyping minoritiesor women by portraying them in a variety of skills and environments.

JOIN videos are designed to show the applicant various jobs entailed in a specific MOS.Real soldiers perform their duties in a wide variety of settings in both pleasant and adverseweather conditions. Ideally, applicants would receive an unbiased view of an MOS.

Is it possible, however, that the JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 under- or over-represent minorities and/or women? If a JOIN video shows an inordinately high percentage ofminorities and/or women, the Army could inadvertently be encouraging minorities and/orwomen to enter these CMFs.

15

A total of 43 JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77, 94, 31 and 88 were viewed to determine

the minority/female representation. CMFs 31 and 88 were included to provide a basis for com-

parison (figures 24 and 25).

•* ri=W

4.40

71 76 7 4 31 u 7 1 76 4 21 M

CMF CMF

Figure 24. Percentage of whites and minorities Figure 25. Percentage of men and womenIn JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77, in JOIN videos for CMFs 71j 76,77,94, 31 and 88 94,31 and 88

SOURCE: Complied from JOIN video, SOURCEi Compiled from JOIN videos,

Reruiling Opmdtlos DirectortA., USAREC. Rerultng Operations Directoral, USAREC.

The percentage of minorities in JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 are much higher

than in CMFs 31 and 88. In CMF 71, minorities are depicted 56.0 percent of the time versusonly 40.5 percent for CMF 88 (the highest control percentage). Female representation, except

for CMF 76, is generally much higher than the control CMFs. An initial conclusion is that

perhaps the high percentage of minorities and women in the JOIN videos is subliminally encour-

aging minorities/women to enter CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94.

In order to validate or refute the initial conclusion, another 54 JOIN videos for CMFs 31

(Signal Operations), 55 (Ammunition), 91 (Medical), 81 (Topographic Engineering), 11 (Infan-

try), 19 (Armor) and 12 (Combat Engineering) were evaluated to determinu if the minority/

female representation in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 was inordinately high (figures 26 and 27).

16

U tO

31 N 91 S1 11 iS 12 31 55 11 I1

CMF CMF

Figure 26. Percentage of whites and minorities Figure 27. Percentage or men and women inin JOIN videos ror other CMFs JOIN videos for other CMFs

SOURCE: Compiled from JOIN vidme SOURCE. Compiled from JOIN videosRecrultinin Operations Directorate, USAREC. Recruiting Operations Directorate, USAREC.

Minority representation in JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 exceeded representa-

tion in the JOIN videos for the additional CMFs, sometimes by as much as 22.5 percent (56.0

percent in CMF 71 versus 23.5 percent in CMF 11). Female representation yielded mixed results

as CMFs 81 and 91 were greater than CMFs 76 and 94. In conclusion, minorities appear to be

over-represented in JOIN videos for CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94. It is conceivable that minorities

are being encouraged to enter these CMFs because they are over-represented in the videos.

YOUTH ATTITUDES

The attitude held by a young American toward the military will definitely influence that

individual's decision to enlist in the military. Attitudes toward certain types of work will also

influence decisions to enter certain CMFs. These attitudes may be a key element in determining

why minorities and females are over-represented in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94. Contrary to USA-

REC's efforts, much of which are controlled and easily measured, youth are difficult to assess.

Appealing to their interests can be extremely difficult, even if their attitudes are understood.

Several surveys are used to try and understand youth attitudes. For the unsold market, an

annual Youth Attitude Tracking Survey (YATS) is administered to obtain data pertaining to

youth propensity, attitudes and motivation toward military service. Because 1990 YATS infor-

mation was not available, a parent/youth survey was used to capture the previous year's

17LM "

attitudes. The sold market was measured through the New Recruit Survey. A representative

sample of new recruits was given a survey to provide the Army with additional insights about the

motivations and attitudes of new soldiers. Several questions also provided clues on the effective-

ness of advertising and recruiters.

In the YATS for 1986-89, youth were queried about their plans for the next few years.

They were asked if they plan to attend college, work, join the military or do something else.

Male responses are shown in figures 28 and 29.

II@ .. m N 0u1 W

.. i LbL L* UW

a a1 06

U 0

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year

Figure 28 Percentae breakout of future Figure 29. Percentage breakout of futureplans, white male responses plans, minority male responses

SOURCL Youth Attitude Tracking Study, Delaw Manpower SOURCE: Youth Atteide Tracking Study, Delanoe ManpowerData Cetinr, 196-&. Data Centr, 196-U.

Male responses may be interpreted at least two ways. First, the percentage of minority

males who Indicated they might join the military far exceeds that of the white male population.

This suggests that male minorities have a higher propensity to enlist. Secondly, a lower percent-

age of male minorities (with the exception of 1988) are inclined to continue their education, One

may conclude that educational benefits are more important to white males while other incentives,

such as bonuses and station of choice, are more attractive to minority males.

18

Female responses to the same question are depicted in figures 30 and 31.

1. 9

U U aFica Yea Fiscal Yearn

Dat Cetr Ngo aaCntr 99

N -aa N as U ST ga .

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year

Figure 30. Percentage breakout of' future Figure 31. Percentage breakout of futureplans, white female responses plans, minority female responses

SOURCE: YOUUI A~lude Tracktinig Study, Defense Manpower SOURCE: Youth Attitude Tracklinl Study, Defense Manpower

Data Centur, 186.89. Data Center, 19U4&9.

The percentage of minority females planning to continue their education (except for

1986) is slightly lower than for white females. Drawing inferences on the differences is difficult

because the differential is so small. Positive responses on working ranged from 20.6 to 28.1

percent for both minority and white females. However, one conclusion is that minority women

are more likely to serve in the military. The highest white female response was 0.8 percent; the

lowest minority female response was 2.4 percent. While the differential is not great, it does

suggest that minority women have a higher propensity to enlist.

1990 Youth Survey

The 1990 Youth Survey was given to a sample of high school juniors and seniors and to

parents of high school juniors and seniors. Questions, were specifically designed to parallel

subjects in YATS.

One question pertains to future employment. The type of job(s) they anticipate holding

are summarized in figures 32 and 33.

19

U4 4

44IR

I 0s

Job k- I Job M

Figure 32. Percentage breakout of job Figure 33. Percentage breakout of jobchoices, males and females choices, whites and minorities

SOURCE: The 1990 Survey of High School Youth and Parents. SOURCE.: The 1990 Survey of High School Youth and Prnota.

Several conclusions may be inferred from figures 32 and 33. First, minorities have a

higher propensity to serve in the military. A higher percentage of minorities felt that they might

join the military (50.1 to 41.6 percent of whites). In addition, when queried about joining the

Army, 14.5 percent more minorities responded in a positive manner, Secondly, both minorities

and women prefer to work in an office environment. This preference may imply that minorities

and women are more receptive to joining administrative CMFs. Lastly, a higher percentage of

minorities indicated a preference for working in a service position or as a tradesman. Since

CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 consist of service-type or tradesman MOSs, it is not surprising that these

CMFs have a relatively high percentage of minorities.

New Recruit Survey

The New Recruit Survey yields insight on reasons for enlistment. One question asks the

new recruit if his/her MOS is similiar to previously held positions and if he/she would like to

work in a similiar position in the future. Figures 34-37 sumn ,. rize responses during the period

1987-89 from new recruits in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94, respectively.

20

go 104

Nt

N jMNt

N1

1: 60

White White Minority Minority White White Minority MlnoityBefore After BefOre After Before After Before After

Figure 34. Percentage in CMF 71 who Figure 35. Percentage in CMF 76 whoprefer this type of job before prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistment and after enlistment

SOURCE: New Recruit Survey, Data Recognition SOURCE: New Recruit Survey, Data RecopildmCorporation, 1987.89. Corporation, 1987.39.

N t

45

I t

S "

White White Minority Minority White White Minority MinorityBetore After Before After Before After Before After

Figure 36. Percentage in CMF 77 who Figure 37. Percentage in CMF 94 whoprefer this type of job before prefer this type of job beforeand after enlistment and after enlistment

SOURCE: New Recruit Survey, Data Recognition SOURCE: New Recruit Survey, Data RecogpidimCor•'aMe, 198749. Corpmratio, 198749.

It is clear that many new recruits expect to use job skills acquired in CMFs 71, 76 and 94

in future positions. In addition, one may infer that many youth worked in restaurants prior to en-

listing in CMF 94. It is possible that many enlistees join CMF 94 because they are comfortable

performing restaurant-related functions, revealing a predisposition for this type of work.

21

TEST SCORES

Every specialty in the Army requires technical proficiency in one or more fields. Since

many applicants do not have prior training or job experience, the Army uses results from the

ASVAB in assessing an applicant's potential to succeed in a particular MOS. In CMFs 71, 76,

77 and 94, the primary qualifying ASVAB scores are clerical (CL), General Maintenance (GM),

Operator and Food (O&F) and Skilled Technician (ST). Another important measure of an appli-

cant's potential is his or her Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score. The AFQT score

represents a combination of scores from four ASVAB subtests: Word Knowledge, Paragraph

Comprehension, Arithmetic Reasoning and Mathematics Knowledge. The AFQT is used to clas-

sify an applicant into test score category I-IliA, 11113 or IV. Recruiting goals and policies are

based on category quotas from the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (DCSPER). Although the

AFQT score is not specifically used to qualify an individual for CMF 71, 76, 77 or 94, it can be

used to evaluate the quality of personnel accessing into those CMFs. Since minimum ASVAB

scores are necessary to enter an MOS, it is conceivable that many minorities and/or women may

not qualify for more than a few MOSs. Is it possible that a high percentage of minorities and/or

women have limited choices of CMFs because of their ASVAB scores?

Test Score Cateories

The applicant's AFQT score places him or her into a particular test score category (TSC).

Figures 38-40 depict the percentage of white and minority accessions since 1985 for each TSC.

;-1-c-- Yer ica Ya

TSC I---IA TS I,,

* U

I t

Figure 38. Percent of personnel in Figure 39. Percent of personnel inTSC I.IlilA TSC IJIB

SOUR1CE: WSAREC mNl.maIra film, 19U6.90 SOURCE: USAREC mhlI-muiw Rie. 16-.90.

22

Nw.M

I• .1-U- U..

IS

U U U T 1 37 O 30

Fiscal Year

Figure 40. Percent of personnel in TSC IV

SOURCE: USAREC mini.madw MIe, 195.90.

The percentage of minorities is much higher than the percentage of whites in TSC IIIB.

This means that minorities score lower on the four ASVAB tests that are used to qualify appli-

cants for specific MOSs. Since many MOSs require high ASVAB test scores, those scoring low

are not qualified to enter certain CMFs.

An applicant's line score (ASVAB) is used to determine if he or she has the potential to

succeed in a particular MOS. As alluded to earlier, a high percentage of applicants will qualify

for an MOS if the line score minimum(s) are low. Table 6 lists the applicable scores required to

qualify for most of the MOSs in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94.

Table 6. Minimum line scores

SMinimum Score

General Maintenance (GM) 90Clerical (CL) 95Operator & Food (OF) 90Skilled Technician (ST) 95

SOURCI QuoIcfatalk Rqo.1 OWdUtm Branc Rwuia'gOpweraw Dainctarts, INARl, 9 Jam. 1991.

23

Figures 41-44 depict the percentage of Army enlistees (whites, blacks and Hispanics) who had ahigh enough line score to enter CM[Fs 71, 76, 77 and 94.

1:

UN

p, 3 ,• i

4...

SWIWI OAK IUFC WWT kMK UPC WWTW "K HSWANC WWISI 'ACK 'UPAC

Male I Female Male I Female

Figure 41. General Maintenance Test: Figure 42. Clerical Test:Percent of Army applicants Percent of Army appliamtsNcroin9 higher coring 2LwZ.hlghaa

SOURCEI Elidberg Mark J., Mapmr for MWearI Opramoe.. SOURCE, Ekubwg Mark J# Manpawer hr Militr pusse...Office dUt Ax. Seamary of DelMtn (Paorm Mamqelmmi ud Office sofI As. SweM d Det .. (FPr Mamaelma mWPerwud), April 1I Mp 2•02.1& Per April S11, pp. 202.213.

4,

bJU M - K MmPK IISPAI WmPMale I Female Male I Femade

Figure 43. Operator and Food Test: Figure 44. Skilled Technician Test:Percent of Army mpplicants Percent of Army applicakMK-oini .J0.bhhllhJr lratine Ltuc.hiuh

bIKMC3, Odbw& Mat J., Mupe fhr MOM"lar Operame... SOURCEs Uele Mark J., Mupwer h• MiIbry Opnrailem011ce f ft. Am. scrar" st Defner (Ve Mmngmm afd o M0 e Am. Somwa" of Dnet (Vew MMaemA NedPermseau), April I1S, pp. M20213. Pernmd), Apr 1104 P1P. W 2W1.

24

In all four categories, minorities scored much lower than whites. This means that minori-

ties, on the whole, qualify for fewer CMFs. For example, 94.7 percent of whites compared to

59.5 percent of minorities qualify for CMFs requiring a GM test score of 90 or higher.

Similar results are obtained when analyzing the percentage of MOSs available with a

particular line score. Figures 45 and 46 show this relationship for CMFs 71 and 76.

71 wit a CLsoeo 5wt C cr f9 n

[a* I

Uu

GM screofBUm

SORC VNVA daap mUA , 190 ORE NVCdtbnl SR 90

Percent aWaite White Minority Mlinorit Percent aWhite White Minority MinorityElieibinityh Male Female Male Female El75ibilctyh Male Femlie Male Femal -

for 6ll CMF7 Percent of Applicant Ergiblitty for ai C.MFl5 Percent of Applmiant EliibiltyFigure 45. Percent eligible for CMF Figure 46. Percent eligible for CMF 7;6

71 with a CL score of 95 with a CL score of 90 and aGM score of 85

SOURCE: UNIVAC databem le USAREC, 1990. SOURCE: UNIVAC Uabam. le USAREC, 1W.

Once again, minorities do not qualify for the same percentage of CMFs as whites. For

example, of the white males in CMF 76, 75.9 percent have a clerical score high enough to qual-

ify for 67.5 percent of all other MOSs. In comparison, only 55.5 percent of minority males have

the same high clerical scores.

An individual's AFQT score also provides valuable information on the quality of acces-

sions into a specific MOS. Figure 47 depicts the percentage of individuals in CMFs 71, 76, 77

and 94 who score below the median on the AFQT,

25

M77 •IS

75 62.9

71 50,3

Figure 47. Perccnt scoring below the AFQT median of 56SOURCE: USAREC nini.maslkr file, 1990.

Except for CMF 71, a high percentage of accessions into these CMFs are in the bottom50 percent of AFQT scores. Since the median score in 1990 was 56, it follows that a large per-centage of accessions into these CMFs are TSC IIIB and IV personnel.

USAREC MISSION ACHIEVEMENT

USAREC receives an annual mission from the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel(DCSPER) for each MOS. In addition, DCSPER gives a specifki quota by MOS for women

(except for those coded "combat"). Table 7 lists the target and achieved percentages for CMFs71, 76, 77 and 94 in 1990.

26

Table 7. USAREC mission achievement (1990) for CMFs 71,76,77 and 94

MALES AND FEMALES

I I- liA 1118

CMF . TARGET ACHIEVED TARGET ACHIEVED

71 66.6% 63.2% 29.9% 36.7%

76 $52.3% 50.8% 41.2% 47.6%

77 48.6% 45.3% 41.3% 53.4%

94 42.0% 38.2% 48.0% 58.2%

ARMY , 3.8% 64.6% 29.7% 33.2%

FEMALES

TARGET ACHIEVED TARGET ACHIEVED

71 66.0% 65.5% 30.0% 34,5%

76 53.8% 46.8% 40.2% 53,2%

77 48.7% 40.8% 40.9% 58.9%

94 42.0% 23.4% 47.9% 76.6%

ARMY 64.8% 65.5% 29.2% 34.5%

SOURCE: Recruiting Operation Dirctorate, Sebrook Report, 19M.

With the exception of CMF 71, the percentage of HIMAs were well below the target while

the percentage of HlBs were well above the target. One may conclude that a high percentage of

minority women could not qualify for other CMFs.

Build.Down Initiatives

Build-down initiatives arc not expected to affect the racial/gender mix of future contracts.

Current plans call for the USAREC battw-ion strength to decrease by eight (from 55 to 47 battal-

ions). Recruiter authorizations will be reduced by 252 (from 5,152 to 4,900). However,

27

USAREC will realign much of the recruiting force to ensure that the entire market can be con-

tacted. Therefore, ongoing build-down initiatives should not affect the racial/gender mix ofcontracts.

U. S. Army Reserves

Minority and female representation in the U.S. Army Reserves (USAR) was not ad-dressed in this paper. While many USAREC recruiting influences, such as advertising, JOIN

videos and sales promotion, remain unchanged, recruiting for the USAR is affected by otherfactors not germane to active Army recruiting. Unit type, vacancies and geographic location

significantly impact on the Reserve recruiter's and the individual's option. Examining these

unique influences was not within the scope of this paper.

CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this paper was to determine if the apparent migration of minorities andwomen into CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 was the result of shortcomings in the recruiting process orenvironmental factors. Initially, it was proven that minorities are over-represented in the Army

relative to the market population, This establishes that CMFs in the Army should have higher

percentages of minorities vis-a-vis the general population. Next, it was shown that CMFs 71, 76,77 and 94 do have a higher percentage of minorities and women relative to other CMFs. In orderto explain this phenomenon, the recruiting process was scrutinized to ascertain if USAREC waschanneling minorities and/or women into these CMFs.

The advertising mediums of television, print and RPIs were deemed to fairly representelements of the Army population. Recruiters and guidance counselors were found to be unbiased

as they process applicants equally into all CMFs. The only component of the recruiting processthat was found to possibly channel minorities and/or women into CMF 71, 76, 77 or 94 were theJOIN videos, which over-represented the percentage of minorities and women compared to the

Army population.Environmental factors were then examined to determine if youth are predisposed to these

CMFs. Results from youth attitude surveys indicate that minorities have a higher propensity to

enlist. In addition, minorities and women are more inclined to work in administrative positions.

It was also shown that a small percentage of enlistees gravitate toward CMFs 71, 76 and 94 due

to past job experiences.

28

Lastly, minorities tend to score lower on the ASVAB and are not qualified to enter

certain CMFs. Coincidentally, CMFs 71, 76,77 and 94 are comprised of many MOSs that have

relatively low line score requirements. The low line score requirements coupled with the appar-

ent predisposition of many minorities and/or women to work in CMFs 71, 76, 77 and 94 are the

main factors contributing to the over-representation of minorities and/or women in these CMFs.

29

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eitelberg, Mark J. Manpower for Military Occupations. Office of theAssistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management and Personnel),April 1988.

Binkin, Martin , Mark J. Eitelberg, Alvin J. Schexnider and Marvin M.Smith. Blacks and the Military. The Brookings Institution, Washing-ton, D.C., 1982.

Military Traiing: Its Effectiveness for Technical Specialties Is Un-known. United States General Accounting Office, Washington, D.C.,October 1990.

Social Representation in the U.S. Military. The Congress of the UnitedStates Congressional Budget Office, Washington, D.C., October 1989.

The 1990 Survey of High School Youth and Parents. HumRROInternational, Inc., Final Technical Report 90-21. U.S. Army Recruit-ing Command, Fort Sheridan, Illinois, September 18, 1990.

New Recruit Survey. Data Recognition Corporation, Minnotka, Min-nesota, 1987-.89.

Youth Attitude Tracking Survey, Defense Manpower Data Center,Survey and Market Analysis Division, 1600 Wilson Boulevard, Suite400, Arlington, VA, 1986-89.

Semi-Annual Occupational Profile of Minorities and Women in theDepartment of Defense. The Research Division, Defense Equal Op-portunity Management Institute, Patrick AFB, Florida, September1990.

Semi-Annual Race/Ethnic/Gender Profile of the Department of De-fense Active Forces. Reserve Forces. and the United States Coast

Quard. The Research Division, Defense Equal Opportunity Mange-ment Institute, Patrick AFB, Florida, September 1990.

30